The Cortland Democrat, Friday, August 17, 1888.
Honoring an Old Settler.
Over sixty years ago Col. Edward H. Castle, of Chicago, Ill., lived with his parents on a farm in Freetown, adjoining one owned by the late General Samuel G. Hathaway. He read law in the office of Samuel Perkins in this village. At that time Wm. Mallery was County Judge, Rufus Rice of Solon, Sheriff, and Samuel Hotchkiss, Clerk of the County. Fifty seven years ago, at the age of 20, Mr. Castle left Cortland, without money but with plenty of ambition, and went to Chicago, Ill., then a village containing about 4,000 inhabitants. Mr. Castle had many old friends in this county, who will be pleased to know that he has been a successful man and is enjoying excellent health at the ripe age of 77 years. He has seen the city of his adoption grow from a village of 4,000 to nearly 900,000 inhabitants. We take the following handsome notice from the Chicago Tribune of the 12th inst.:
Fifty years ago Col. Edward H. Castle established the first Odd Fellows' lodge out of Philadelphia at Carbondale, Pa. On the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the lodge he sent the organization a silver goblet and pitcher, whereupon the lodge passed resolutions thanking him and spread a flattering memorial on the records.
Col. E. H. Castle came to Illinois in 1838, and assisted in building the Illinois & Michigan Canal. He also opened a trading post at Chicago in 1839. Old settlers give Castle the credit of shipping the first 100,000 bushels of wheat from Chicago to New York. He also assisted in building the first railroad into the city, and was one of the old standbys in building up Chicago. He had charge of all the railroads in the Western Department for the Government during the Rebellion, and established the tariff for railroads for the Government, Congress passing a law confirming the Castle rates for freight and passengers and Government stores and ammunitions of war during the Rebellion. He built the pontoon bridges for the Shenandoah Valley, and was with Fremont and Sheridan during Sheridan's raid after Stonewall Jackson up the valley.
An Attempt at Incendiarism.
Last Saturday morning about one o’clock fire was discovered in the wooden building in the rear of the Opera House. The Janitor of the house and the property man of the Wilson's Minstrels were the first to discover it and they immediately gave the alarm, and rushing into the house took out the hose on the rear of the stage and turned on the water. By the time the department reached the spot the flames were extinguished.
That the fire was of incendiary origin there can scarcely be a question. Under the building were found a quantity of auction bills and a lot of show papers to which the fire had been set and which were partially consumed. Had the perpetrators of the dastardly act waited another hour it is probable that their plans would have succeeded. The Opera House being of brick would probably not have been much damaged, but the barn and other buildings belonging to the Cortland House would have had a narrow escape.
For some time past a gang of hoodlums have been in the habit of hanging around the halls and lobby of the Opera House, to the great annoyance of the patrons of the house. The present managers, Messrs. Robbins and Smith, [are] determined to drive them out and have placed an officer in the front hall to keep it clear. Whether the deed was done by some of those who were ejected last Friday night is, of course, only a matter of speculation.
The managers wish it distinctly understood that the halls of the Opera House are for the accommodation of its patrons and that, hereafter, all persons lounging around in them or on the premises will be promptly arrested and summarily dealt with. Mild measures have failed so far and if recourse to more stringent ones must be had, there will be no hesitation in adopting them. Ladies and gentlemen may visit the house at any time and be assured that, while on the premises at least, they will be free from insult.
A Blaze at Killawog.
Last Friday about noon, the steam saw mill at Killawog, a small station on the D. L. & W. railroad was entirely destroyed by fire. It was first seen when the owner, Mr. Twing R. Hitt, was at dinner, and despite the fact that every effort was made to save it, it burned rapidly to the ground. There was at the time a light wind blowing toward the south and sparks in great numbers were wafted by this toward the most thickly settled portion of the hamlet. It was soon discovered that several other buildings were on fire, and though the citizens worked with a will the chances were becoming desperate.
The department at Marathon was then telegraphed for and the members promptly responded, accompanied by a number of the citizens. Their action doubtless saved the town from being entirely destroyed as the residents of Killawog were fast becoming exhausted.
Mr. Hitt estimates his loss on the mill at $3,000, on which there was no insurance. Besides the mill he loses about three thousand feet of sawed lumber, part of which was for a house in Binghamton. It will not be rebuilt. The other damage was slight.
A Dangerous Ride.
Henry Hunter, of Dryden, says the Herald of that place, had a strange and dangerous adventure the other day. Mr. Hunter runs a traction engine, and in descending a series of very steep and long hills some of the machinery got out of order. The engine could not be reversed and plunged madly down the Varna and Ithaca hills.
In the Varna hills there are places fixed to turn the water out of the centre of the road, and through these the engine, weighing about 8,700 pounds, with nothing to check its speed, went like a boy coasting on a sled in winter.
In descending the hill near the McGraw-Fiske mansion, on entering Ithaca, the engine attained still greater speed, and when going at almost its fastest, a sharp turn in the road had to be made. After flying around this turn the engine slowed up somewhat, and descended the rest of the hills at a more moderate rate.
HERE AND THERE.
Dog days end August 26th.
Firemen’s convention opens next Tuesday.
Marathon people are organizing a brass band for campaign meetings.
Marathon people are organizing a brass band for campaign meetings.
The banquet of the State Firemen’s Convention will be held in the Taylor Opera House next Wednesday evening.
The firemen are putting up very large and handsome arches at the Cortland House, Messenger House and Court street corners on Main street.
The Telephone Company are rendering night service now, to the great satisfaction of our citizens. The office will be open on Sunday from 9 to 10 A. M., and from 5 to 6 P. M.
The official programme of the State Firemen’s Convention, a large sixteen page pamphlet, will be issued from the DEMOCRAT office. Copies can be attained at this office on and after Tuesday next.
A lady of Marathon recently, while berrying, had a peculiar and unpleasant experience with a snake. While seated on the ground she thought she felt something moving about beneath her, but on getting up discovered nothing. In a few moments she felt something moving in her dress, outside of her corset, and opening the dress took out a small snake. Her dress was a loose one, unbelted, and the snake had crawled up under it while she was on the ground.—Marathon Independent.
TOMPKINS--A portrait of Mrs. Jennie McGraw-Fiske has been placed in the Southworth library, Dryden.
There came near being another conflagration at the depot in Dryden, Friday night. During the severe thunder shower that night a heavy bolt of lightning entered the depot by running along the telegraph wire, burned up a small pile of papers on the telegraph table, and charred a place in the wall about a foot square.
The contract of putting in the system of waterworks at Groton has been awarded to Morgan A. Reynolds of the Moravia Waterworks Co. for the sum of $21,750. The work will be begun in a few days, and it is thought can be completed in sixty days, although the contract allows ninety days for its completion. From seventy five to one hundred men will be employed, as far as possible local labor.
Wells College Burned.
AURORA, Aug. 9.—The main building of Wells College was burned this morning with its entire contents. Morgan Hall and the laundry was saved by hard work by the citizens. The fire is thought to have started in the kitchen. It is said that there is an insurance of $100,000 which will not cover half the loss. The foundation for an extension of the main building was nearly completed. It was expected to have part of it ready for use when the fall term opened.
Abraham Lincoln framed the shortest reply that can be made to the Republican platform: "You can fool all the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time.—Kingston Argus.
On Wednesday last the United States Senate passed 127 private pension bills in fifty minutes. And yet some of the members of that body have the effrontery to question the judgment of the president in disagreeing with their conclusions in regard to such bills. When a legislative body disposes of bills, involving the expenditure of the people's money at the rate of more than two a minute, or one in every twenty four seconds, it is time for some one authorized by the Constitution, to interpose an objection. The real state of the question is that the pension business has become a farce in congress. It is no longer a question of patriotism or regard for the claims of those who fought for the country, but the giving away of the people's money to everybody who puts in a claim for it.—Kingston Argus.
Last week the Standard published quite a lengthy editorial on "Tariff and Potatoes," in which the editor undertook to claim that potatoes were placed on the free list by the Mills bill. This week the editor reasserts the statement that potatoes are placed upon the free list by the Mills bill. It is very evident that the intelligence of our neighbor is at a very low stand or else he is lying and that willfully. There are those who will be charitable enough to think that he isn't competent to construe the plain provisions of the law, while others will lay the blame to his natural propensity for enlarging on facts. Even an ordinary Justice of the Peace would be able to give a better and more correct interpretation of the law than our neighbor does. Potatoes are protected by a tariff of fifteen cents per bushel and any statement that the Standard may make to the contrary is false. It is to be regretted that an editor should be so ignorant or so wicked as to attempt to deceive his readers upon a question of importance to them.
The World boils down the financial question—otherwise the tariff—in a plain way:
(1.) The war tariff was a tariff for bounties. Henry Clay and Henry C. Carey fixed upon a duty of 35 percent, as adequate for protection in 1842. Mr. Morrill and his party associates, having full power, adopted the average of 38 per cent, as adequate for both protection and revenue in 1862. The increase of 48 per cent was made, Mr. Morrill and Thaddeus Stevens both declared in the House as a "Compensation" (in other works as a bounty) to manufacturers to offset internal revenue taxes on their products which were long since repealed. Mr. Morrill reavowed this in 1870 and proclaimed in Congress that the manufacturers had no right to retain this bounty as the "lawful prize of protection."
(2.) The present tariff is a tariff for surplus. It yielded last year nearly $130,000,000 more than was needed for the expenses of the Government.
(3.) It is the greed of Plutocrats that resists a reduction of duties. A Plutocrat is one who exercises power or rules by his wealth. If it were not for the men who have grown rich out of the tariff no organized resistance would be made to a reduction of duties. President Foster, of the Republican League, understood and confessed this when he sent his famous money raising circular to rich manufacturers and mine-owners, as "those who are not benefited by our tariff laws."
AN OLD FARMER’S TALE.
He Objects to Paying a Bounty to the Man on the Other Side of the Fence.
(Nebraska letter to the Chicago Times.)
I have been reading in the Times the debate among the farmers on the tariff question and, as I am a farmer, was a soldier, also was one of the seventeen who voted the Republican ticket in this country in 1856, I would like to make a few remarks on the subject.
Now, in my opinion, both sides are too fond of citing certain instances and from these drawing conclusions that I think have little or nothing to do in the case. For instance, if I have a large corn crib full of corn and a good many fat rats it does not follow that I am under any obligations to the rats for my good crib of corn, even admitting that they are home consumers. I grant that the rats have got fat at my expense, but that the rats have been any great benefit to me I deny. That Mr. Manufacturer has got fat charging me 50 cents for a 25-cent jack-knife I grant; but that my pocket-book has got fat by the transaction I deny. I also grant that Mr. Manufacturer, by making such trades, has more money to pay his hired hands higher wages, but that it does not follow that he does pay them higher wages. But I’ll tell you what does follow—that I have less to pay my hired hands, whether I get them for less or not.
It seems to me that the correspondents have good memories when it suits them and very bad ones when it does not suit them. Thus, "A" tells us that when the Republican or Democratic party, as the case may be, was in power in such and such a year we had good times, but he invariably forgets the two years before and the four years after that were bad times. This nonsense we are fond of calling "history" or of quoting as "statistics." In fact a person, and especially a politician, can play any tune he chooses out of that good, useful old fiddle "statistics" especially if he has farmers to listen to him that believe they are making money by giving 30 cents for a 23-cent knife.
Now, to prove what I say about the knife being true, I will cite you a few instances that came under my observation. In the year of the centennial, 1876, I went to England, and there I found I could buy American-manufactured goods for one-half less than I could buy them at home. For instance, a Wheeler & Wilson sewing machine sold in England for $30; here the same thing sold at $85. In fact two of my nearest neighbors about that time raised corn, hauled it sixteen miles to the city of Omaha—the best market Nebraska has— and sold it for 16 cents a bushel to pay for a similar sewing machine at $90. Wood's combined reaper and mower in England was sold at $100; here the same implement, is sold at $200. In Liverpool, England, I bought a silver watch chain for $2.50. A neighbor of mine bought one at Chicago (one could hardly tell them apart) and paid $6.25 for his. When weighed mine was the heavier of the two. I bought a suit in England of black broadcloth made to order for $20. Such a suit would cost me at Omaha $30. A jack-knife that I paid 25 cents for in Liverpool would have cost 60 cents here.
But the worst of the whole thing was that while I was at that time paying from $12 to $15 per month wages to my hired hands in Nebraska, and on a farm, farmers in Northumberland, in the north of England, were paying for similar hired hands from $17 to $20 per month. [sic] There were at least 150 mechanics and laborers in the same ship from Philadelphia to Liverpool that I went in, going abroad to seek employment. In fact every one might remember about mechanics going from New York to Glasgow in that year. They could only get from $1 to $1.25 in New York or even Chicago, while they got $2 in Glasgow and passage paid.
Will some one give me reasonable evidence what benefit it is to me to pay $2 extra per 1,000 on lumber? Such evidence would be thankfully received. Mere assumptions or assertions are not wanted. I get more of them than I can use.
Will some one give me reasonable evidence why I, living on one side of a fence, raising corn, beef and pork should pay a bounty out of the proceeds of these articles to a man on the other side of the fence that raises sheep or sugar-cane? Suppose he does buy a large per cent of my product; do I not buy a larger per cent of his? Therefore, if he is a great benefit to me I must be a still greater benefit to him; and if I pay him for the benefits I receive from him why should he not pay me in proportion for the benefits he receives from me? Is not sauce for the goose sauce for the gander?